Judaism makes a clear distinction between the value of human life and animal life (see here and here); for this reason the comparison between pet and child that is part of the original question is not a helpful analogy.

There is no requirement that Jews who are observant of traditional Jewish practice must, or should, give up an existing pet or even avoid adopting a new pet. The fact that some newly observant Jews do give up their pets may be an expression of their association with a particular community of other observant Jews. That is, there are communities of observant Jews for whom having a pet is seen as inappropriate – this approach is not based in a prohibition by Jewish law, rather, it is a phenomenon of socialization and communal identification (identifiable groups include those of Middle Eastern culture and Haredim – though exceptions do exist). Still, there could be some halakhic/Jewish legal origin for such a phenomenon.

Traditional Jewish observance includes not touching any object on shabbat that has no utilitarian purpose on shabbat – these objects are called “muktzeh.” For example, since one is forbidden to write on shabbat the rabbis decreed that touching a pencil/pen is prohibited on shabbat – in this way, the sages wanted to “build a fence” around the Torah that would guard against people making mistakes either through forgetfulness or error. Pets as we know them today – dogs, cats, gerbils, birds… – are a relatively modern development. For earlier generations of humans in general and Jews in particular, the only animals of contact were farm animals such as cows, goats, chickens and horses. Since a requirement of sabbath observance is to allow one's animals to rest – no plowing, carriage riding, milking – the animals had no utilitarian purpose on shabbat and, thus, animals were categorized as muktzeh by our tradition. Accordingly, avoidance of pet ownership makes sense for those for whomanimals have no utilitarian purpose on shabbat.

However, if a person finds a companion animal to be a source of joy, companionship, affection, play, support, or other benefit there is no absolute prohibition to such a relationship whether it be shabbat or any other days of the week. Companion animals are a relatively recent development in the Jewish world so it is understandable that questions arise regarding appropriate approach to the modern human-animal relationship. Whether one desires to absent companion animals from his personal realm or desires to include companion animals in his personal realm – both positions are available for the religious-minded practitioner. Rather than abandoning pets, it may be wise for pet owners to find like-minded communities that allow for the reconciliation of one's observance of Jewish practice to be integrated with one's approach of mutually beneficial relationship with companion animals.

The short answer: There is no legal prohibition to breed dogs for money.

The longer answer is to evaluate the business and animal ethics surrounding the activity – which specifically touches on the questioner's language of “Jewish values.” The dog/pet industry is fraught with animal abuse and mistreatment by the breeders/suppliers of animals. Pure bred animals tend to have greater health problems than mixed breed dogs (due to repetitive inbreeding and more), and breeding more dogs into a society that already has an overwhelming number of homeless dogs in kennels, pounds, shelters and rescue centers are ethical aspects concomitant in the industry. There is also the aspect of participating in the label-oriented, consumerism that encourages a desire for pure-bred, designer dogs as symbol and pursuit of higher social status.

For kosher species of fowl/poultry that have been properly slaughtered according to laws of kosher slaughter and found to be free of any disqualifying injuries/illnesses/blemishes – all edible parts of the animal are permitted for consumption (excluding blood).

It is healthy to desire to memorialize and respectfully remember a beloved companion animal, and it may be attractive to employ elements of the Jewish mourning customs to grieve the loss of a pet.

The mourning practices of Judaism are powerful, effective and wise, and they express utmost respect and recognition that those who die are vessels of a sacred soul for whom we shared a unique familial bond; they also address the unique pain and sorrow that accompanies the mourner over such a loss of life. For these reasons, using the tools of Jewish mourning is inappropriate for the death of an animal.

The idea to memorialize in a specifically Jewish way via a yahrtzeit candle and/or a similar memorial service is to conflate three matters:

the Jewish identity of the one who is grieving;

the Jewish customs associated with mourning the loss of a family member; and

the death of a non-human.

Jewish mourning rituals are reserved for a Jew who loses a close family member (parent, spouse, sibling or child). In the same way it would be inappropriate for non-Jewish mourners to adopt Jewish mourning practices – because it is a misapplication of our sacred religious ritual that is specifically defined to exclusive circumstances – so, too, it is inappropriate to apply Jewish mourning practices to the death of a non-human life.

A core value of Judaism is the recognition of the intrinsic value of each human life because we believe that humans share qualities with Gd that are exclusive to these two beings. While the desired effect may be to elevate the worth of an animal's life by mourning it in a human way, in fact and in practice it denigrates the worth of human life. The death of a human family member and that of a companion animal are meant to be, and are, incomparable. To be clear – Jewish mourning is not about the level of love felt toward the object that is lost but is the recognition of the departure of a soul from our world – a soul that possessed unique, Gd-like qualities to transform the world whether or not those qualities were ever actualized.

To light a yahrtzeit candle on the anniversary of both the death of a parent and a pet is to place their cosmic worth on similar planes – though one who is Jewish may choose to do so the act is counter to Judaism.

Jewish law does not legislate what one ought to bring to a shiva home. It is customary to bring food so that the mourners need not worry about providing themselves with food during a time when the focus is their loss. If food is brought, it should be delivered on a very simple tray/platter – nothing fancy so as to avoid the appearance of trying to impress those in the shiva home.Also, strict standards of kashrut should be observed when providing mourners with food so as to avoid the mourners or visitors to be distracted by questions of food permissibility.

In lieu/addition to food, making a contribution to a mourner's favorite tzedakah organization or to the deceased's synagogue is most appropriate.

A thoughtful gift may also be to write a letter of positive memories about the deceased so that the mourner may feel support and comforted and strengthened by the affirmative thoughts of their passed loved one.

Question: My grandmother and my grandfather were both Jews. They left Germany to escape the Holocaust and went to Brazil. My mother is not a Jew and my dad studied at a Catholic school. Am I considered a Jewish person?

The Conservative movement holds the traditional halakhic (legal) standard regarding matters of defining a person’s Jewish status. Jewish law holds that an individual is Jewish if his/her birth mother is Jewish or if the individual completes a legal conversion process. The legal conversion process includes study and observance, mikve (ritual submersion) – and in the case of males ritual circumcision or its equivalent – in the presence of witnesses, and getting the approval of a beit din (panel of qualified judges).

In the case of this questioner, your Jewish status does not meet Judaism’s legal requirements.

Question: My father is Jewish and I have been raised Jewish my entire life. My mother was not raised Jewish but her side of the family believes that my great grandmother (my mother's mother) was Jewish. We are not 100% percent sure if she was Jewish or not and this has left me very confused. I do not know if I should convert or not and I am very hesitant to do so because I already feel Jewish. Converting would not change my ethnicity or how i feel as a Jewish person. I feel that if i would convert it would mean that I wasn't Jewish before and that is not how I feel. What should I do?

Judaism is a religion and way of life that emphasizes commitment and obligation to community. It offers a framework for a society of people to trust each other, to feel supported and safe in the expression of shared values and practices , and to protect and safeguard traditions of a people who trace lineage and practice back over 3,000 years. In order to accomplish its level of success in the above areas, Judaism has clearly defined boundaries of behavior, practice and even membership. This membership need not be seen as discriminatory or exclusive as no matter what a person’s background or race – inclusion by way of conversion with equal standards for everyone is an option for all who desire.

Your sense of Jewish identity is strong and you feel you are a Jew. Still, your question communicates your own uncertainty as to the halakhic (legal) status of your Jewishness. Your decision to go through a legal conversion process need not be an admission or retroactive denial of your Jewish status; rather, it may be seen as your way to eliminate any technicality issues that one could cast upon your status. Thus, your conversion is an expression of your care and commitment for community – that is, it is an act that puts the values of the community above the personal.

Anecdotally, I believe industrially manufactured cheese (like milk) does not require kashrut supervision to have kosher status. However, I will only purchase, use and serve cheese that has kosher supervision in my home in order to eliminate any area of question/concern that others in the community who hold a different standard could have regarding cheese. Similarly, your conversion in order to remove any question in the minds of others about your legal Jewish status is a sign of your commitment and care for the community rather than a statement of your own feelings of Jewish status.

There is no doubt that Jews of all backgrounds and practices may believe that dogs and cats have souls; accordingly I would like to reframe the question and respond to the following:

Does *normative Jewish thought support the idea that dogs and cats have souls?

The question assumes that 'soul' is a given, understood term and as such need not be defined; however, without clarifying its meaning any answer would be fallible. For the sake of this response, 'soul' is understood as the Jewish concept of a non-corporal entity that consciously influences physical behavior toward either good (yetzer ha’tov) or bad (yetzer ha’rah). Action which is only instinctual or learned while void of an ethical decision making process – e.g. sleep, hunger, thirst, reproduction, survival – is not a sign of the Jewish concept of 'soul.'

The Biblical verse that communicates the Jewish understanding of ‘soul’ is found in Proverbs20:27נר ה' נשמת אדם – Gd’s light is the human soul. ‘Soul’ is that part of a person's constitution which manifests Gd’s image – that part of us that **incorporates intellect, emotion, psychology, wisdom, experience, thoughtfulness, consideration, expectation, humor, loyalty, relations, consequence, ethics, morality and more as we attempt to interact with the world. In other words, ‘soul’ is the Gd part of humans as expressed in thought and action. As such, humans are capable of altruism and unselfish behavior for the sake of others even to our own detriment. Much of human behavior is the result of calculated thought whereby we decide to act in our own best interests – dogs and cats and most all animals also act in their own best interest but their behavior is the result of an amoral decision making process. Much of conscious human activity is action that can be classified as having moral overtones.

There are certainly recorded incidents of animal behavior that goes against the natural instincts of seeking pleasure and avoiding pain. Those instances are not the normative, recognizable behavior of animal species. Whereas it is fair to claim that human understanding of animal behavior is limited by our imperfect ability to communicate with animals, it is also fair to claim that 'soul' is a term reserved to label a feature exclusive to humans.

It is understandable that many people, Jews and non-Jews alike, want to attribute the personality and intellect of animals to the concept of soul. There is no doubt in this author's mind that animals have a connection and relationship to Gd, have the capacity to be in friendship with others, and whose behavior is influenced by a decision process. However, to label these characteristics as 'soul' is to misrepresent the Jewish understanding of soul.

In closing, it would be incorrect to believe that if animals do not have a 'soul' they are merely ambulatory organisms not worthy of consideration or compassion. Though Judaism does not place animals on the same plane as humans in terms of capacity to manifest the attributes of Gd, human treatment of sentient creatures is legislated by Jewish law. Our tradition recognizes that animals with a perception and consciousness of pain and pleasure – physical and/or emotional – deserve the benefit of human employment of the very soul that would have us act responsibly, compassionately, and with humility toward these virtuous creatures with whom we share Gd’s world.

** That someone may have a disability and is therefore not able to incorporate the attributes of Gd into her daily life does not mean that a soul is absent. The soul certainly accompanies such a person throughout her lifetime, but the expression of the soul is stymied by the bio-physical limitations of the person.

THE VIEWS EXPRESSED IN ANSWERS PROVIDED HEREIN ARE THOSE OF THE INDIVIDUAL JVO PANEL MEMBERS, AND DO NOT
NECESSARILY REFLECT OR REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF THE ORTHODOX, CONSERVATIVE OR REFORM MOVEMENTS, RESPECTIVELY.